The amazing story of Rep. Pete Sessions earmarking money for blimp design for a company nowhere near his district is renewing questions about how often the earmark-disclosure system is abused by lawmakers who falsely report details of their "pork" priorities.
Under House rules, lawmakers are required to file publicly available request letters for earmarks that list "the name and address of the intended recipient or, if there is no specifically intended recipient, the intended location of the activity."
Politico reported that the beneficiary of Sessions', R-Texas, $1.6 million earmark for a streamlined blimp -- a company that paid a former Sessions aide handsomely for lobbying services -- isn't located at the address listed on the lawmaker's disclosure form from 2008.
" [T]he company that received the earmarked funds, Jim G. Ferguson & Associates, is based in the suburbs of Chicago, with another office in San Antonio -- nearly 300 miles from Dallas. And while Sessions used a Dallas address for the company when he submitted his earmark request to the House Appropriations Committee last year, one of the two men who control the company says that address is merely the home of one of his close friends."
The Appropriations Committee does not vet for accuracy any of the tens of thousands of disclosure forms it receives each year -- relying instead on lawmakers' honor -- and it is not entirely clear that reporting false information is even a violation of House rules.
"This underscores that the lack of accountability undercuts transparency in earmarks. Right now it is all self-policing and there is no punishment for fudging the facts or obfuscating the details," said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group that tracks earmarks. "We find all kinds of shenanigans: lawmakers laundering the true beneficiary behind government agencies, listing the prime contractor as the beneficiary when it is really a local subcontractor or, in this case listing an address that has little to do with the true earmark recipient."
Post A Comment